A few words about the way I use place names in my research ... Unlike many researchers, I use place names as they are defined in current time. Example: I am very well aware that Avoyelles Parish did not come into existence until 1807 and, before that, the area now known as Avoyelles was part of the District of Rapides. Prior to that, the Avoyelles area was part of the Territory of Orleans. Therefore, I may show an act that occurred in the Mansura area in 1804 as Avoyelles Parish, Louisiana even though the act, technically, took place in Mansura, District of Rapides.

I chose long ago to use current place names for a number of reasons - including the fact that my method makes it much easier to identify the location in which supporting documents are found today. This might not seem like such a big deal in more recent history but it is significant, for instance, in the old records of France. Boundaries there changed quite frequently and the boundaries were not always clearly defined. I have always felt that it does me no good to identify an act in France as having occurred in one of the ancient provinces since few people would understand what location I'm talking about based on today's administrative divisions of France. In my humble opinion, it is much easier to research the history of a particular area by tracing it backwards rather than attempting to begin tracing the history of any area from long ago to current time. (Video)

Also, those of you who have done any research in the State of Virginia will understand what I'm talking about. The county lines there changed repeatedly in the early days of this country and it is sometimes very difficult to identify the county place names even if multi-generations of a single family were born in the same town.

Sorry if you don't agree.